Wisconsin native, conservative critic of everything.
"Once abolish the God, and the government becomes the God." ---G K Chesterton
"The only objective of Liberty is Life" --G K Chesterton
"Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions" --G K Chesterton
"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition." -- Rudyard Kipling

Saturday, July 14, 2012

Deeper and Deeper in Racine

At least two Racine poll workers involved in an incident where numerous bags full of ballots had their security compromised when the bags were ripped, torn, burst or otherwise damaged on election night signed recall petitions and are refusing to answer questions about the suspicious ballot bags. In the final days of the recount of the recall election in Senate District 21, members of the Racine County Board of Canvass compelled several poll workers to answer questions under oath about the compromised condition of ballot bags from their polling locations. Michael Clark, a chief election inspector at the Caesar Chavez Community Center polling place, and Darlene Farr, another poll worker at the same polling place, both offered testimony that contradicted the testimony of Donna Deuster, Deputy Clerk of the City of Racine and the official tasked with managing election-related activities.

More at the link. I don't think it's a big deal that they signed the recall petitions; 750,000 people did.

But I do think it's a big deal that under-oath testimony is problematic.

This is YOU--Rampant fraud exists, but we can't detect it, but we can make unfounded accusations all we want as "evidence", but when the truth comes out that there is no fraud to be found, well, it may not be there in the open, but it still has a menacing presence.

The only "smoke" is the one your blowing up everyone's wazoo with the childish notion that in every close election that a Democrat/liberal wins, he/she won through illegal means.

The first link? A clear indication by you that McCain lost two close races due to alleged (D) voter fraud, and that this conduct is expected in 2012 to take place just like 2008. I think YOU should read for meaning. If (D)'s can't win a tight race, then you believe they take them illegally.

The second link? The title. YOUR words. The inference is clear...close elections lost by (R) is due to (D) machinations.

The third link? Again, the title. YOUR words. Very apparent how you feel.

The meaning is clear on your part. Why even lie about it? Guilty conscious?